Mark Zuckerberg's Free Basics argument doesn't address conflicts of interest

Re:Mark Zuckerberg's Free Basics argument doesn't address co... by dnautics on Thursday December 31, 2015 @03:35AM (#10816826)

private organizations do not necessarily maximize profit. There are plenty of nonprofits (archive.org, e.g.), benefit organizations (rotary, lion, etc), research institutes/funders (HHMI, ACS, AHS, UL), NGOs (MSF, HRW, JWB, etc.) Each of these organizations would arguably be in a worse position if the things they were doing were attached to state functions.

Mozilla is another example, and then there are standards boards, IEEE, e.g., which are very closely tied to industry. So why not internet.org?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mark Zuckerberg's Free Basics argument doesn't address co... by firasd on Thursday December 31, 2015 @03:42AM (#10816840)

Speaking of Mozilla, they have weighed in by making a submission to the regulator, siding with net neutrality http://blog.mozillaindia.org/1558

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mark Zuckerberg's Free Basics argument doesn't address co... by himprak on Thursday December 31, 2015 @04:18AM (#10816920)

Putting Facebook in the same category as Rotary, NGOs, research institutes and the remaining long list you mention cannot be a more flawed analogy.

In any case, you seem to be missing the bigger point here - it's not about whether FB is promoting this today for maximizing profit or not, it's about promoting the re-modelling of the internet where information flow is controlled by FB.

[ Parent | on HN ]